A prosecuting attorney in a criminal case presented as principle evidence small
ID: 891744 • Letter: A
Question
A prosecuting attorney in a criminal case presented as principle evidence small fragments of tile glaze found embedded in the shoes of the accused. The prosecutor claimed that the fragments were identical in composition to a glaze used on rare Pewabic tiles broken during the crime. The average of eleven analyses each for zirconium in the fragments from the shoes and the tile are shown below. Based on these results are the data significantly different and does the defendant have grounds for claiming reasonable doubt as to guilt? Use 95% confidence level as criterion for doubt. (12 points)
Element
from shoes
from tile
pooled standard deviation
spooled
Zr
123 ppb
109 ppb
5.60
Element
from shoes
from tile
pooled standard deviation
spooled
Zr
123 ppb
109 ppb
5.60
Explanation / Answer
This is a confidence interval test
H0 = it is not from the place (the ppm of the shoes are similar to that of the tile)
H1 = it is from the place (ppm of the shoes are NOT similar to that of the tile)
n = 11 samples
Interval
From the interval test
Confidence Interval:
±3.31
Range for the true population mean:
119.69 to 126.31
We are 95% confident that this is NOT the actual tile, and the subspect should not be prosecuted
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.